TECHNICAL FIELD
[0001] Various embodiments of the present disclosure generally relate to communicating forthcoming
conflicts between an aircraft and a moving object and, more particularly, to assisting
aircraft crews with identifying forthcoming conflicts between an aircraft and a moving
object with high accuracy and reliability.
BACKGROUND
[0002] Identifying conflicts between an aircraft trajectory (e.g., a reference flight plan)
and a path of a moving object (e.g., weather hazard, other aircraft, etc.) is among
the most safety-critical tasks for the crew of an aircraft. The role of such tasks
is becoming increasingly more essential because of the increasing demand from various
systems and subsystems of aircraft equipment (e.g., flight management system (FMS),
connected FMS (cFMS), avionics components, etc.) for path conflict data. Thus, it
may be highly desirable for an aircraft to implement a process for effectively and
accurately outputting conflict detection information to other systems, functions,
clients, or services associated with aircraft. Additionally, it may be highly desirable
for such process to provide conflict detection data with enhanced reliability and
transparency, while reducing crew workload.
[0003] The background description provided herein is for the purpose of generally presenting
the context of the disclosure. Unless otherwise indicated herein, the materials described
in this section are not prior art to the claims in this application and are not admitted
to be prior art, or suggestions of the prior art, by inclusion in this section.
SUMMARY OF THE DISCLOSURE
[0004] According to certain aspects of the disclosure, systems and methods disclosed relate
to assisting aircraft crews with identifying forthcoming conflicts between an aircraft
and a moving object with high accuracy and reliability.
[0005] In one embodiment, a computer-implemented method for dynamically detecting aircraft
trajectory conflicts against a moving object is disclosed. The method may include:
receiving, by one or more processors, one or more environmental inputs, the one or
more environmental inputs including one or more object characteristic parameters of
the moving object; determining, by the one or more processors, object movement data
indicative of one or more projected movements of the moving object, based on the one
or more environmental inputs; receiving, by the one or more processors, a flight trajectory
of an aircraft; and dynamically determining, by the one or more processors, an aircraft
estimated time of arrival at an intersection between the flight trajectory and the
one or more projected movements of the moving object.
[0006] In another embodiment, a computer system for dynamically detecting aircraft trajectory
conflicts against a moving object is disclosed. The computer system may include: a
memory having processor-readable instructions stored therein; and at least one processor
configured to access the memory and execute the processor-readable instructions, which
when executed by the processor configures the processor to perform a plurality of
functions, including functions for: receiving one or more environmental inputs, the
one or more environmental inputs including one or more object characteristic parameters
of the moving object; determining object movement data indicative of one or more projected
movements of the moving object, based on the one or more environmental inputs; receiving
a flight trajectory of an aircraft; and dynamically determining an aircraft estimated
time of arrival at an intersection between the flight trajectory and the one or more
projected movements of the moving object.
[0007] In yet another embodiment, a non-transitory computer-readable medium containing instructions
for dynamically detecting aircraft trajectory conflicts against a moving object is
disclosed. The instructions may include instructions for: receiving, by one or more
processors, one or more environmental inputs, the one or more environmental inputs
including one or more object characteristic parameters of the moving object; determining,
by the one or more processors, object movement data indicative of one or more projected
movements of the moving object, based on the one or more environmental inputs; receiving,
by the one or more processors, a flight trajectory of an aircraft; and dynamically
determining, by the one or more processors, an aircraft estimated time of arrival
at an intersection between the flight trajectory and the one or more projected movements
of the moving object.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
[0008] The accompanying drawings, which are incorporated in and constitute a part of this
specification, illustrate various exemplary embodiments and together with the description,
serve to explain the principles of the disclosed embodiments.
FIG. 1 depicts an example environment in which methods, systems, and other aspects
of the present disclosure may be implemented, according to one or more embodiments.
FIG. 2 depicts a diagram of an overview of an example implementation described herein,
according to one or more embodiments.
FIG. 3 depicts a diagram of an example implementation of dynamically determining reliability
metrics, according to one or more embodiments.
FIG. 4 depicts a flow diagram in which methods, systems, and other aspects of the
present disclosure may be implemented, according to one or more embodiments.
FIG. 5 depicts an exemplary method dynamically detecting aircraft trajectory conflicts
against a moving object, according to one or more embodiments.
FIG. 6 depicts an exemplary computer device or system, in which embodiments of the
present disclosure, or portions thereof, may be implemented.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION
[0009] The following embodiments describe methods and systems for dynamically detecting
aircraft trajectory conflicts against a moving object. As described above, there is
a need to implement a process for effectively and accurately outputting conflict detection
information to other systems, functions, clients, or services associated with aircraft.
Additionally, it may be highly desirable for such process to provide conflict detection
data with enhanced reliability and transparency, while reducing crew workload. As
described in more detail below, such needs can be met by analyzing path conflict detections
and resolutions at different temporal points (e.g., mid-term and long-term resolutions)
of an aircraft path, for example in a 4-D state, and simultaneously assessing and
outputting reliability metrics of the analysis based on uncertainty and/or variability
of the parameters fed into the analysis.
[0010] The subject matter of the present description will now be described more fully hereinafter
with reference to the accompanying drawings, which form a part thereof, and which
show, by way of illustration, specific exemplary embodiments. An embodiment or implementation
described herein as "exemplary" is not to be construed as preferred or advantageous,
for example, over other embodiments or implementations; rather, it is intended to
reflect or indicate that the embodiment(s) is/are "example" embodiment(s). Subject
matter can be embodied in a variety of different forms and, therefore, covered or
claimed subject matter is intended to be construed as not being limited to any exemplary
embodiments set forth herein; exemplary embodiments are provided merely to be illustrative.
Likewise, a reasonably broad scope for claimed or covered subject matter is intended.
Among other things, for example, subject matter may be embodied as methods, devices,
components, or systems. Accordingly, embodiments may, for example, take the form of
hardware, software, firmware, or any combination thereof (other than software per
se). The following detailed description is, therefore, not intended to be taken in
a limiting sense.
[0011] Throughout the specification and claims, terms may have nuanced meanings suggested
or implied in context beyond an explicitly stated meaning. Likewise, the phrase "in
one embodiment" as used herein does not necessarily refer to the same embodiment and
the phrase "in another embodiment" as used herein does not necessarily refer to a
different embodiment. It is intended, for example, that claimed subject matter include
combinations of exemplary embodiments in whole or in part.
[0012] The terminology used below may be interpreted in its broadest reasonable manner,
even though it is being used in conjunction with a detailed description of certain
specific examples of the present disclosure. Certain terms may even be emphasized
below; however, any terminology intended to be interpreted in any restricted manner
will be overtly and specifically defined as such in this Detailed Description section.
Both the foregoing general description and the following detailed description are
exemplary and explanatory only and are not restrictive of the features, as claimed.
[0013] Referring now to the appended drawings, FIG. 1 depicts an example environment 100
in which methods, systems, and other aspects of the present disclosure may be implemented,
according to one or more embodiments. A vehicle, such as an aircraft 102, may be moving
along a predetermined flight trajectory 104 (e.g., a reference business trajectory
(RBT) as shown in FIG. 1). By applying the characteristics of aircraft 102 movement
(e.g., speed, direction, capabilities, schedule, etc.), with the locational coordinates
of the flight trajectory 104, a computing system (e.g., a computing system at an airborne
mission manager, a ground mission manager, a ground control center, and/or an on-board
computing system on aircraft), such as computing system 600 depicted in FIG. 6, may
determine and store four-dimensional (4-D) coordinates of the flight trajectory 104.
For example, estimated times of arrival 105a-105c (ETAs) of the aircraft 102, as shown
in FIG. 1, may serve as a dimension being added to at least some of the 3-D locational
coordinates. The ETAs 105a-105c may include an aircraft ETA uncertainty (shown by
the shaded portions of ETAs 105a-105c in FIG. 1). However, taking ETAs 105a-105c into
account may significantly reduce uncertainty associated with a movement path prediction
and accurate conflict prediction arising from it. It is understood that ETAs 105a-105c
are exemplary only and any ETA (and any number of ETAs) of aircraft 102 along trajectory
104 may be used.
[0014] The computing system 600 may evaluate a potential interception of a moving object
106 (e.g., a moving weather condition as depicted in FIG. 1) with flight trajectory
104. The computing system 600 may be in communication with various detectors and/or
detection techniques, such as, for example, WXR radar (weather radar), a transmitter
communicating with other systems or operators for receiving or exchanging data (e.g.,
forecast data) over one or more networks, internal or external sensors, internal or
external detectors, aircraft LRUs (line replaceable units), etc. Using such detectors
and/or detection techniques, various input parameters may be received, in order for
the computing system 600 to analyze potential path conflicts between aircraft 102
and moving object 106.
[0015] For analyzing the potential path conflicts with a particular moving object 106, the
computing system 600 may receive inputs including, for example, location of the moving
object 106 (e.g., 3-D location), speed vector of the moving object 106 (e.g., 3-D
vector, or a vector resulting from a computation based on two or more successive records
of a weather layer), severity of the moving object 106, size of the moving object
106, and/or a trajectory 104 (e.g., RBT) of aircraft 102.
[0016] Using these inputs, the computing system 600 may identify a conflicting segment 108.
As shown in FIG. 1, the conflicting segment 108 may be, for example, a predicted intercept
center location, or a range associated with the predicted intercept center location.
The conflicting segment 108 may be determined by, for example, identifying one or
more intersections of the 4-D paths of the aircraft 102 (e.g., trajectory 104) and
the moving object 106, or identifying a predicted intercept center location (e.g.,
conflicting segment 108) by dynamically computing (e.g., using speed vector, severity,
and/or size) various 3-D locations of the moving object 106 based on time. Once the
conflicting segment 108 is identified, the computing system 600 may compute a predicted
ETA window 110 in which a conflict may occur along the trajectory 104 (e.g., the RBT).
The computing of the predicted ETA window 110 may take into account uncertainty margin
or a margin of error, as shown in FIG. 1. A conflict predicted time and conflict severity
data may also be computed along with the conflicting segment 108 and the predicted
ETA window 110. For example, the conflict predicted time may be the most likely time
of conflict (e.g., time associated with the predicted intercept center location shown
in FIG. 1), within the predicted ETA window. The conflict severity data may be, for
example, severity data of the moving object 106 corresponding specifically to the
conflicting segment 108 and/or the conflict predicted time.
[0017] Once the conflict ETA window 110 is determined, the computing system 600 may compare
the aircraft 102 ETA along the conflicting segment 108 with the predicted ETA window
110, and assess if a conflict may exist (e.g., yes/no and/or true/false). For example,
the assessment may be based on a comparison of the aircraft 102 ETAs and the predicted
ETA window 110 of the moving object 106. In response to determining that a conflict
may exist (e.g., yes), the computing system 600 may also assess and output reliability
metrics associated with the assessed conflict, based on various factors (e.g., time,
aircraft location, prediction performances, etc.) as discussed in more detail with
respect to FIG. 3. In response to determining that a conflict does not exist (e.g.,
no), the computing system may exit the conflict detection process for this particular
moving object, or return to it at a later time periodically and/or dynamically.
[0018] FIG. 2 depicts a diagram of an overview of an example implementation 200 described
herein, according to one or more embodiments. As discussed above with respect to FIG.
1, the computing system 600 may receive, periodically and/or dynamically, one or more
inputs 202-204. The inputs may include environmental inputs 202 and an aircraft trajectory
204 (e.g., trajectory 104). The environmental inputs 202 may include, for example,
weather data (weather conditions potentially affecting a flight path) and/or traffic
data (e.g., other aircraft in the shared airspace) associated with the aircraft 102.
In addition, the environmental inputs 202 may include parameters specific to each
moving object 106 (e.g., location of a moving object 106 in 3-D or 4D coordinates),
speed vector of the moving object 106 (e.g., 3-D vector, or data indicative of two
or more successive records of a weather layer), severity of the moving object 106,
and size of the moving object 106. Further, an aircraft trajectory 204 may be among
the inputs received by the computing system 600. The aircraft trajectory 204 may include,
for example, flight trajectory 104 of the aircraft 102 (e.g., RBT), alternative flight
paths of the aircraft 102, and/or 4-D representations of any of the flight paths associated
with the aircraft 102.
[0019] In some implementations, the computing system 600 may host or communicate with multiple
different software and/or hardware engines (e.g., conflict detection engine 206 and
conflict resolution engine 208) with respective roles divided between conflict detection
and conflict resolution. Under these implementations, the example steps discussed
above with respect to FIG. 1 may be steps performed by the conflict detection engine
206. The inputs 202-204 associated with the moving object 106 and the aircraft trajectory
(discussed above) may be received by the conflict detection engine 206. Additionally,
data output by the conflict detection engine 206 may, for example, be called by, or
pushed to, various other systems, functions, clients, or services associated with
an aircraft 102. For the purpose of resolving path conflicts, the conflict detection
engine 206 may feed output data into conflict resolution engine 208, in order to enable
a definition of a flight plan or trajectory, that is, for example, free of any conflict
and capable of being flown by the aircraft 102 with a low probability of re-routing
or tactical intervention. If the computing system 600 determines (e.g., via the conflict
detection engine 206) that an action is needed at the conflict resolution engine 208,
then the conflict resolution engine 208 may determine the appropriate course of action
and transmit the appropriate course of action back to an onboard computer of aircraft
102, such as a flight management system (FMS). For example, as shown in FIG. 2, the
conflict resolution engine 208 may transmit a flight plan revision 210 back to a source
of the aircraft trajectory data (e.g., FMS), and the revisions may, for example, generate
a modified aircraft trajectory that is, in turn, periodically or dynamically fed into
the conflict detection engine 206 in a subsequent iteration of the process depicted
in FIG. 2. It is understood that the engines 206, 208 may be executed by a processor
(e.g., CPU 620) of computer system 600 and may be combinable into a single engine/module
and/or may each include multiple engines and/or modules.
[0020] FIG. 3 depicts a diagram of an example implementation 300 of dynamically determining
reliability metrics, according to one or more embodiments. The reliability metrics
may be indicative of a likelihood that the one or more dynamically determined conflict
times and/or conflict locations are accurate predictions for the moving object 106
and the aircraft 102. Thus, the reliability metrics may vary according to the uncertainty
of the aircraft ETAs 105a-105c in the predicted ETA window 110 discussed in detail
with respect to FIG. 1 above. The reliability metrics may be indicative of at least
two factors, such as, for example, (i) the uncertainly associated with motion of the
aircraft 102, and (ii) the uncertainty associated with location and motion of the
moving object 106. A weather condition included in the inputs 202-204 (e.g., a condition
included in the environmental inputs discussed above with respect to FIG. 2), for
example, may be forecast data from more than two hours ago, potentially causing variability
in the location information of the weather condition. While on-board tools such as
a WXR radar may be able to confirm the validity of location, movement rate, and/or
trends in strength, size, or rates of the weather condition, assessing such an uncertainty
may further enhance the accuracy and reliability of the conflict detection process.
[0021] The uncertainty of aircraft ETAs 105a-105c may increase as flight time and/or duration
between the aircraft 102 and the moving object 106 increases. For example, the further
aircraft 102 is away from moving object 106, the more uncertainty will exist. The
degree of the uncertainty may differ based on performances and compliance standards
associated with the particular aircraft 102. For example, if the airborne systems
of an aircraft 102 are DO-236C compliant, especially with the RTA (required time of
arrival) analysis capabilities, then insertion(s) of one or more down-path RTAs may
facilitate with reducing the ETA uncertainties.
[0022] Accordingly, as shown in FIG. 3, the reliability metrics (e.g., metrics indicative
of a likelihood that the one or more dynamic conflict times and the one or more conflict
locations are accurate predictions for the moving object 106 and the aircraft 102)
may decrease as a potential conflict is further down-path from the current aircraft
102 location (shown at time T
1 in FIG. 1). For example, the conflict predicted time 302 at time T
1 may include a low reliability due to the moving object 106 being further away from
aircraft 102 and/or trajectory 104. In contrast, as the moving object 106 gets closer
to the aircraft 102 and the trajectory 104 (e.g., the RBT), the reliability metrics
may increase (shown at time T
2 in FIG. 1). Foe example, the conflict predicted time 302 may be updated as aircraft
102 moves along trajectory 104 and moving body 106 moves closer to aircraft 102 and/or
trajectory 104, as detailed above. The updated conflict predicted time 304 may include
a high reliability due to the moving object 106 being closer to the aircraft 102 and/or
the trajectory 104.
[0023] The reliability metrics may provide valuable indications to the crew, by indicating
a need to initiate rerouting immediately (e.g., high reliability indicating a high
risk associated with a lack of immediate, corrective actions), or alternatively indicating
a sign or an evidence to wait for evolution of the detected condition (e.g., weather
condition) to, for example, avoid taking undue or costly corrective action. As shown
in FIG. 3, the degree of being further down-path may be measured by conflict predicted
time and/or predicted conflict location (e.g., latitude/longitude).
[0024] FIG. 4 depicts a flow diagram 400 in which methods, systems, and other aspects of
the present disclosure may be implemented, according to one or more embodiments. An
input 202 may be received, including object characteristics (size, location, severity,
speed, etc.). In step 402, based on the inputs 202, computing system 600 may determine
projections associated with a path of the moving object 106 (e.g., projection along
the movement axis). The computing system 600 may also receive inputs 204 pertaining
to flight path of the aircraft 102 associated with the computing system 600, such
as a primary flight plan or the RBT 104, as detailed above. In step 404, based on
both sets of inputs 202-204, as well as the determined projections associated with
a path of the moving object 106 (step 402), the computing system 600 may determine
the intersection of the path of the moving object 106 with a flight plan of the aircraft
102 (e.g., trajectory 104, such as FMS flight plan or the RBT). In step 406, based
on the determination of the intersection (step 404), computing system 600 may produce
various outputs, such as, for example, conflict location or segment 108, conflict
predicted time, ETA window 110, and/or severity.
[0025] These outputs may then be used as input parameters for steps 408 and 410. In step
408, computing system 600 may determine the aircraft ETA at the conflict location.
In step 410, computing system 600 may compare the predicted times (e.g., aircraft
ETA at the conflict location, and the moving object's conflict time at the conflict
segment) to determine if conflict may actually exist. In step 412, based on the comparison(step
410), computing system 600 may generate outputs, including, for example, an indication
on whether or not a conflict exists (e.g., true/false), conflict latitude/longitude
data, a conflict predicted time, and/or conflict reliability data.
[0026] FIG. 5 depicts an exemplary method 500 for dynamically detecting aircraft trajectory
conflicts against a moving object, according to one or more embodiments. In step 505,
computing system 600 (e.g., one or more processors of computing system 600) may first
receive one or more environmental inputs, the one or more environmental inputs including
one or more object characteristics parameters of the moving object 106. The object
characteristic parameters may include at least one of a size, location, severity,
or speed of the moving object 106.
[0027] In step 510, the computing system 600 may determine object movement data indicative
of one or more projected movements of the moving object 106t, based on the one or
more environmental inputs. In step 515, the computing system 600 may receive a flight
trajectory 104 of aircraft 102.
[0028] In step 520, the computing system 600 may dynamically determine an aircraft ETA at
an intersection between flight trajectory 104 and moving object 106. For example,
computing system 600 may determine the intersection based on the determined object
movement data and the flight trajectory 104. The computing system 600 may determine
a conflict segment 108 along the flight trajectory 104 and a conflict predicted time
based on the intersection and then determine the aircraft 102 ETA at the conflict
segment.
[0029] Computing system 600 may further compare the aircraft 102 ETA at the intersection
(e.g., and a moving object 106 ETA at the intersection. Based on the comparing, the
computing system 600 may determine whether a conflict exists between the aircraft
102 and the moving object 106. If a conflict exists, the computing system 600 may
dynamically determine one or more reliability metrics, one or more dynamic conflict
times, and one or more dynamic conflict locations. As detailed above, the reliability
metrics may be indicative of a likelihood that the one or more dynamic conflict times
and the one or more dynamic conflict locations are accurate predictions for the moving
object 106 and the aircraft 102. Further, if a conflict exists, computing system 600
may also determine whether an action is required to resolve the conflict., determine
the required action, and output the required action. In some embodiments, the required
action may include computing system 600 modifying the flight trajectory 104 of the
aircraft 102 to avoid the moving object 106.
[0030] FIG. 6 depicts an exemplary computer device or system, in which embodiments of the
present disclosure, or portions thereof, may be implemented. Each of the computing
system(s), databases, user interfaces, and methods described above with respect to
FIGS. 1-5 can be implemented via device, such as computing system 600, using hardware,
software, firmware, tangible computer readable media having instructions stored thereon,
or a combination thereof and may be implemented in one or more computer systems or
other processing systems. Hardware, software, or any combination of such may implement
each of the exemplary systems, user interfaces, and methods described above with respect
to FIGS. 1-5.
[0031] If programmable logic is used, such logic may be executed on a commercially available
processing platform or a special purpose device. One of ordinary skill in the art
may appreciate that embodiments of the disclosed subject matter can be practiced with
various computer system configurations, including multi-core multiprocessor systems,
minicomputers, mainframe computers, computers linked or clustered with distributed
functions, as well as pervasive or miniature computers that may be embedded into virtually
any device.
[0032] For instance, at least one processor device and a memory may be used to implement
the above-described embodiments. A processor device may be a single processor or a
plurality of processors, or combinations thereof. Processor devices may have one or
more processor "cores."
[0033] Various embodiments of the present disclosure, as described above in the examples
of FIGS. 1-5, may be implemented using device 600. After reading this description,
it will become apparent to a person skilled in the relevant art how to implement embodiments
of the present disclosure using other computer systems and/or computer architectures.
Although operations may be described as a sequential process, some of the operations
may in fact be performed in parallel, concurrently, and/or in a distributed environment,
and with program code stored locally or remotely for access by single or multiprocessor
machines. In addition, in some embodiments the order of operations may be rearranged
without departing from the spirit of the disclosed subject matter.
[0034] As shown in FIG. 6, device 600 may include a central processing unit (CPU) 620. CPU
620 may be any type of processor device including, for example, any type of special
purpose or a general-purpose microprocessor device. As will be appreciated by persons
skilled in the relevant art, CPU 620 also may be a single processor in a multi-core/multiprocessor
system, such system operating alone, or in a cluster of computing devices operating
in a cluster or server farm. CPU 620 may be connected to a data communication infrastructure
610, for example, a bus, message queue, network, or multi-core message-passing scheme.
[0035] Device 600 also may include a main memory 640, for example, random access memory
(RAM), and also may include a secondary memory 630. Secondary memory 630, e.g., a
read-only memory (ROM), may be, for example, a hard disk drive or a removable storage
drive. Such a removable storage drive may comprise, for example, a floppy disk drive,
a magnetic tape drive, an optical disk drive, a flash memory, or the like. The removable
storage drive in this example reads from and/or writes to a removable storage unit
in a well-known manner. The removable storage unit may comprise a floppy disk, magnetic
tape, optical disk, etc., which is read by and written to by the removable storage
drive. As will be appreciated by persons skilled in the relevant art, such a removable
storage unit generally includes a computer usable storage medium having stored therein
computer software and/or data.
[0036] In alternative implementations, secondary memory 630 may include other similar means
for allowing computer programs or other instructions to be loaded into device 600.
Examples of such means may include a program cartridge and cartridge interface (such
as that found in video game devices), a removable memory chip (such as an EPROM, or
PROM) and associated socket, and other removable storage units and interfaces, which
allow software and data to be transferred from a removable storage unit to device
600.
[0037] Device 600 also may include a communications interface ("COM") 660. Communications
interface 660 allows software and data to be transferred between device 600 and external
devices. Communications interface 660 may include a modem, a network interface (such
as an Ethernet card), a communications port, a PCMCIA slot and card, or the like.
Software and data transferred via communications interface 660 may be in the form
of signals, which may be electronic, electromagnetic, optical, or other signals capable
of being received by communications interface 660. These signals may be provided to
communications interface 660 via a communications path of device 600, which may be
implemented using, for example, wire or cable, fiber optics, a phone line, a cellular
phone link, an RF link or other communications channels.
[0038] The hardware elements, operating systems and programming languages of such equipment
are conventional in nature, and it is presumed that those skilled in the art are adequately
familiar therewith. Device 600 also may include input and output ports 650 to connect
with input and output devices such as keyboards, mice, touchscreens, monitors, displays,
etc. Of course, the various server functions may be implemented in a distributed fashion
on a number of similar platforms, to distribute the processing load. Alternatively,
the servers may be implemented by appropriate programming of one computer hardware
platform.
[0039] The systems, apparatuses, devices, and methods disclosed herein are described in
detail by way of examples and with reference to the figures. The examples discussed
herein are examples only and are provided to assist in the explanation of the apparatuses,
devices, systems, and methods described herein. None of the features or components
shown in the drawings or discussed below should be taken as mandatory for any specific
implementation of any of these the apparatuses, devices, systems, or methods unless
specifically designated as mandatory. For ease of reading and clarity, certain components,
modules, or methods may be described solely in connection with a specific figure.
In this disclosure, any identification of specific techniques, arrangements, etc.
are either related to a specific example presented or are merely a general description
of such a technique, arrangement, etc. Identifications of specific details or examples
are not intended to be, and should not be, construed as mandatory or limiting unless
specifically designated as such. Any failure to specifically describe a combination
or sub-combination of components should not be understood as an indication that any
combination or sub-combination is not possible. It will be appreciated that modifications
to disclosed and described examples, arrangements, configurations, components, elements,
apparatuses, devices, systems, methods, etc. can be made and may be desired for a
specific application. Also, for any methods described, regardless of whether the method
is described in conjunction with a flow diagram, it should be understood that unless
otherwise specified or required by context, any explicit or implicit ordering of steps
performed in the execution of a method does not imply that those steps must be performed
in the order presented but instead may be performed in a different order or in parallel.
[0040] Throughout this disclosure, references to components or modules generally refer to
items that logically can be grouped together to perform a function or group of related
functions. Like reference numerals are generally intended to refer to the same or
similar components. Components and modules can be implemented in software, hardware,
or a combination of software and hardware. The term "software" is used expansively
to include not only executable code, for example machine-executable or machine-interpretable
instructions, but also data structures, data stores and computing instructions stored
in any suitable electronic format, including firmware, and embedded software. The
terms "information" and "data" are used expansively and includes a wide variety of
electronic information, including executable code; content such as text, video data,
and audio data, among others; and various codes or flags. The terms "information,"
"data," and "content" are sometimes used interchangeably when permitted by context.
[0041] It is intended that the specification and examples be considered as exemplary only,
with a true scope and spirit of the disclosure being indicated by the following claims.
1. A computer-implemented method for dynamically detecting aircraft trajectory conflicts
against a moving object, comprising:
receiving, by one or more processors, one or more environmental inputs, the one or
more environmental inputs including one or more object characteristic parameters of
the moving object;
determining, by the one or more processors, object movement data indicative of one
or more projected movements of the moving object, based on the one or more environmental
inputs;
receiving, by the one or more processors, a flight trajectory of an aircraft; and
dynamically determining, by the one or more processors, an aircraft estimated time
of arrival at an intersection between the flight trajectory and the one or more projected
movements of the moving object.
2. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further including:
determining, by the one or more processors, the intersection between the flight trajectory
and the one or more projected movements of the moving object based on the determined
object movement data and the received flight trajectory.
3. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further including:
determining, by the one or more processors, a conflict segment along the flight trajectory
and a conflict predicted time based on the intersection between the flight trajectory
and the one or more projected movements of the moving object.
4. The computer-implement method of claim 3, further including:
determining, by the one or more processors, the aircraft estimated time of arrival
at the determined conflict segment.
5. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further including:
comparing, by the one or more processors, the aircraft estimated time of arrival at
the intersection and a moving object estimated time of arrival window at the intersection;
and
based on the comparing, determining, by the one or more processors, whether a conflict
exists between the aircraft and the moving object.
6. The computer-implemented method of claim 5, further including:
if a conflict exists, dynamically determining, by the one or more processors, one
or more reliability metrics, one or more dynamic conflict times, and one or more dynamic
conflict locations, the one or more reliability metrics indicative of a likelihood
that the one or more dynamic conflict times and the one or more conflict locations
are accurate predictions for the moving object and the aircraft.
7. The computer-implemented method of claim 5, further including:
if a conflict exists, determining, by the one or more processors, whether an action
is required to resolve the conflict;
if an action is required, determining, by the one or more processors, the required
action; and
outputting, by the one or more processors, the required action.
8. The computer-implemented method of claim 7, wherein the required action includes modifying,
by the one or more processors, the flight trajectory of the aircraft to avoid the
moving object.
9. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the object characteristic parameters
of the moving object include at least one of a size, location, severity, or speed
of the moving object.
10. A computer system for dynamically detecting aircraft trajectory conflicts against
a moving object, comprising:
a memory having processor-readable instructions stored therein; and
at least one processor configured to access the memory and execute the processor-readable
instructions, which when executed by the processor configures the processor to perform
a plurality of functions, including functions for:
receiving one or more environmental inputs, the one or more environmental inputs including
one or more object characteristic parameters of the moving object;
determining object movement data indicative of one or more projected movements of
the moving object, based on the one or more environmental inputs;
receiving a flight trajectory of an aircraft; and
dynamically determining an aircraft estimated time of arrival at an intersection between
the flight trajectory and the one or more projected movements of the moving object.
11. The computer system of claim 10, wherein the functions further include functions for:
determining the intersection between the flight trajectory and the one or more projected
movements of the moving object based on the determined object movement data and the
received flight trajectory.
12. The computer system of claim 10, wherein the functions further include functions for:
determining a conflict segment along the flight trajectory and a conflict predicted
time based on the intersection between the flight trajectory and the one or more projected
movements of the moving object.
13. The computer system of claim 12, wherein the functions further include functions for:
determining the aircraft estimated time of arrival at the determined conflict segment.
14. The computer system of claim 10, wherein the functions further include functions for:
comparing the aircraft estimated time of arrival at the intersection and a moving
object estimated time of arrival window at the intersection; and
based on the comparing, determining whether a conflict exists between the aircraft
and the moving object.
15. The computer system of claim 14, wherein the functions further include functions for:
if a conflict exists, dynamically determining one or more reliability metrics, one
or more dynamic conflict times, and one or more dynamic conflict locations, the one
or more reliability metrics indicative of a likelihood that the one or more dynamic
conflict times and the one or more conflict locations are accurate predictions for
the moving object and the aircraft.